Jump to content

Redbook CD vs hi-res format - is there a difference?


mmilovan

Recommended Posts

A few semi-related comments...

I think the reasons SACD isn't taking off like some hoped are more complicated than simply that most of the general public doesn't care about sound quality. It is certainly true that much of the public does not, but there is more to it than that, I think.

A big factor, IMO, is that SACDs can't be copied. I bought all the Rolling Stones hybrid discs, and a few others, but the "non-copyability" makes this format pretty much a non-starter for me. If I spend the kind of money the music industry asks for an SACD I damn well better be able to copy it to my hard-drive and make my own custom CDRs. That is one of the great joys of owning music, at least for me.

Another consequence of the efforts to make SACDs non-copyable is the lack of a "digital out" for the data, so there is no provision for people who want to experiment with external DACs.

I'm in the process of ripping my CD collection to FLAC format, in anticipation of adding a nice quality external USB DAC and cheap PC to my system as a source. Since SACDs can't be ripped, they will be left behind in this rapidly emerging trend as well. The day is soon coming, and may already be here, when lossless digital files played back through a high quality DAC rival the sonic quality of high end analog systems.

IMO, the greed of the music industry and their desire to be in total control of music consumers has doomed a promising audio format. They gouge us on CD prices, get pissed when we want to copy them and then try to cram a workaround for that (SACD) down our throats, and then wonder why the format isn't flying? The sonic benefits are clear to me. Make SACDs copyable and I will choose them, every time!

In the end, the corporate greedheads are going to be out of the equation, with artists selling directly to consumers, ala

Radiohead. It didn't have to be this way. New release, high audio quality, copyable CDs for $9.98 instead of non-copyable versions for $18.98 would have enabled this format to fly, and also enabled the music industry to stay in the game, IMO.

OK, rant off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My son, who's got all the hard drives in the world he needs, came and listened with me while I was proofing the master of Patricia's latest and we got into an interesting discussion about the sound; the quality of the bass, the size of the voice, the placement of the instruments, etc. We're listening on Wilson Watt Puppies and a Levinson pre and amp and he can appreciate the difference...

It happened the same with my son: we listend to Nirvana's Nevermind through his iPod hooked on my system and my MoFi vinyl copy, he can appreciate the difference, nevertheless he is more interested in having a lot of music for free then a better audio playback system.

Talking about youth, I think that for my son and his friends, music is only one of the many things they enjoy (or consume). I think about them as "Multitasking youth". All is readily available on the hard drive and on the net. So he listen to music, chat with friends, works on Photoshop, surf the web and downloads music or movies all at the same time. No way he sit down and carefully listen to a whole "album". ("Album" is such a sweet old fashion word, now musicians think and speak about "project".) I mean that music is only one of the things that they use to socialize: they have movies, dancing, internet, videogames, cell phones...

When I had his age, I wanted only two things... well, three things, considering sex :rolleyes: a good stereo system with a lot of records and a motorbike. Later I wanted a better stereo system, more records, a faster motorbike... and more sex :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riverrat: you're not quite right here. Of course you could copy the red book layer of the Rolling Stones SACD/hybrids to your computer. Also there is a digital out standard for DSD signals. I forgot the name but it's a sort of telephone socket connection. Of course only the upmarket players have this (and then not all as well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riverrat: you're not quite right here. Of course you could copy the red book layer of the Rolling Stones SACD/hybrids to your computer. Also there is a digital out standard for DSD signals. I forgot the name but it's a sort of telephone socket connection. Of course only the upmarket players have this (and then not all as well).

There are two digital outs for SACD of which I'm aware: Denon Link (the aforementioned "telephone socket"--it's actually an RJ-45 ethernet-style jack), which only comes on high-end Denon players and receivers, and HDMI 1.2 and above, which is available on most newer mid-market and above receivers. It's also available on the Playstation 3, but it decodes to PCM before streaming the signal to a receiver. Not all HDMI 1.2-enabled receivers can decode DSD, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riverrat: you're not quite right here. Of course you could copy the red book layer of the Rolling Stones SACD/hybrids to your computer. Also there is a digital out standard for DSD signals. I forgot the name but it's a sort of telephone socket connection. Of course only the upmarket players have this (and then not all as well).

There are two digital outs for SACD of which I'm aware: Denon Link (the aforementioned "telephone socket"--it's actually an RJ-45 ethernet-style jack), which only comes on high-end Denon players and receivers, and HDMI 1.2 and above, which is available on most newer mid-market and above receivers. It's also available on the Playstation 3, but it decodes to PCM before streaming the signal to a receiver. Not all HDMI 1.2-enabled receivers can decode DSD, though.

AFIK along with Denon, some of the hi-end digital top brands provides a SACD digital outs (or inputs) like the new Linn Klimax DS or dCS stuffs

http://www.linn.co.uk/klimax_ds#

http://www.dcsltd.co.uk/index2.html

All these products (transports and D/A converters) are top notch priced (over 10 K) that is an argument in favour of Riverrat's post: if you cut the prices, you win the format's war, if you made unfriendly a format for users you lost.

Consider the pros about CD vs Vinyl, though the first digital generation sounded worst IT WAS THE THING: long lasting, space-saving, ecc. Something that matters for common customers. And afterwards the fact that you can transfer your music on computer, iPod, made your compilation, ecc.

Now all the industry decided that even personal copying is illegal.

You gave to customers a car with A/C, Satellite Navigator, ABS and all the optionals, and now you're trying to sell a car without any optional, yes is a better car, a Ferrari maybe, but who cares about the 200 mph if I don't have the A/C. I mean that only the die hard customers would buy it.

As long as your first concern is avoiding illegal copying by any means and at the same time you fight a war for "your" format (SACD vs DVD-A vs Blue-Ray vs Multichannel-whatever), you puzzled the consumers, and in the long run you may loose the war, and kill a new better format.

Edited by porcy62
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My son, who's got all the hard drives in the world he needs, came and listened with me while I was proofing the master of Patricia's latest and we got into an interesting discussion about the sound; the quality of the bass, the size of the voice, the placement of the instruments, etc. We're listening on Wilson Watt Puppies and a Levinson pre and amp and he can appreciate the difference...

Hi Jim,

One point I am always a little concerned about is the size of the voice, in most cases (especially jazz vocalists) I find the voice to be too big, thus my question is.

Who makes the decisision?? do the purchasing public want the voice to be big and you give it too them big. I am a jazz vocalists fan and have many friends singers whenever I make them listen to their recordings on my fairly high end system they say Woww! I never know I sounded this big!

I also know that most audiophiles like to hear everything and I suppose that making the voice big

does make this possible.

The other point is, to my ears you are one of the few recording engineer that manage to get the piano sounding real, a case in point is "Mythologies"

Why so few recordings engineers are able to do that, by now they should know what to do??

Thanks

jazz1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Groover,

Would you want to expand on what you're calling the size of the voice?

These days, many projects are mixed many ways: vocal up, vocal down, vocal stems, etc., and the decision is made in the mastering.

I really don't work that way and don't like to give others the opportunity to play around with the mix.

As far as who's making the decision, not to be facetious, it's the one who's writing the check. It could be the artist, producer, record company, etc.

I know, I like to work in the studio and create a balanced mix that everyone agrees upon.

The mix can be manipulated a little in mastering, but not drastically remixed.

As far as the piano in Mythologies, thanks, it's a 7' Fazioli. http://www.fazioli.com/eng/index.php

It was interesting, for me. When I first heard the instrument, I had to come up with some new tricks to record it.

It didn't project like a Yamaha or a Steinway.

We used a Fazioli on the new recording, as well, and I'm pretty proud of what we were able to come up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Groover,

Would you want to expand on what you're calling the size of the voice?

Well I suppose that it depends on the actual singer, lot's of singers with smallish voice most probably

sings with the mic "in their mouth" so to speak and I find this a little disturbing.

Maybe it is a question of deciding how far forward in the mix is the voice?

I really like when the instrument have the right scale, a guitar should not sound as big as a double bass

etc.

As far as the piano in Mythologies, thanks, it's a 7' Fazioli.

Wow!! nice to know, this is to me how a piano should sound.

In most cases I find the piano, too distant or too close and most of all not sounding natural.

Thanks for the info, maybe you could give me a few tips as far as good sounding jazz piano

recordings you did.

best

jazz1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riverrat: you're not quite right here. Of course you could copy the red book layer of the Rolling Stones SACD/hybrids to your computer.

Yes, I'm aware of that. And even the redbook layer is a VAST improvement over the original remasters. I am thankful for that! My point was that the BEST sounding version of this music is not copyable, even for personal use.

Also there is a digital out standard for DSD signals. I forgot the name but it's a sort of telephone socket connection. Of course only the upmarket players have this (and then not all as well).

I was not aware of the fact that players are available with SACD/DSD outputs. Sounds like they are very high end only, which I think does not refute my point. Marketing SACD- a true improvement in CD technology- as a package that basically shuts down what I see as a consumer's right to copy the music for personal use has had much to do with its apparent failure to replace redbook CD technology in the marketplace.

That's my position and I'm sticken to it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tech name of the DSD output/input is IEEE1394.

The IEEE1394 standard is probably better known as FireWire and i.Link.

You're right ! :blink:

I never had sexual intercourse with SACD, just read the specs of the hardware on websites. I didn't realize it.

BTW, Thanks :)

edit: in theory you'd need only a software to convert it in whatever format you'd like, Am I wrong? As far as the DSD signal is not encrypted like dCS does.

Edited by porcy62
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the "Solo" CD, there's no difference. The original was recorded for Blue Note and the import shouldn't be any different, unless they put in a bonus tune (which I doubt).

While recording that album, I tracked enough microphones to make a proper surround mix, if it was ever called for.

My favorite track is the second...

The new Gonzalo recording "Avatar" will be released by Blue Note 2.8.08

Edited by jim anderson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the "Solo" CD, there's no difference. The original was recorded for Blue Note and the import shouldn't be any different, unless they put in a bonus tune (which I doubt).

While recording that album, I tracked enough microphones to make a proper surround mix, if it was ever called for.

My favorite track is the second...

The new Gonzalo recording "Avatar" will be released by Blue Note 2.8.08

Thanks, Ive ordered "Solo" and will give you my impressions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

While recording that album, I tracked enough microphones to make a proper surround mix, if it was ever called for.

My favorite track is the second...

The new Gonzalo recording "Avatar" will be released by Blue Note 2.8.08

Hi Jim,

Got Gonzaldo "Solo: cd yesterday and thanx a million it is stunning, not only the sound of the Bosendorfer but Gonzalo playing as as you said the second track is the best although I love it all.

Obviously on the second track one get to know how powerful a piano can sound.

This is definetely my new piano demo cd.

Other suggestions of this caliber would be welcomed.

How is "Avatar' ?? is the same piano used??

Once again a million thanx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Jazz 1

I just spent the last couple of days listening to Gonzalo and his quintet at the Village Vanguard in celebration of the release of "Avatar."

When we recorded those tunes, they were hot off the press and now the band has them under their skin.

They've just returned from a tour of Russia and are hitting the road some more.

The "Avatar" piano is a Yamaha 9' grand.

I was trying something a little different with the sonics of the band, in general, and wouldn't mind hearing some opinions.

Best,

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would direct you to my recording of Terrance Blanchard "Let's Get Lost." It is available in SACD and Redbook versions.
Thanks for the suggestion. Do I need to buy two copies of Let's Get Lost to do this, or is there a redbook layer on the SACD that's identical to the CD release?

Edit: Never mind. Answered my question when the SACD came in the mail...it's not a hybrid. Stunning recording, as usual, thanks again for the recommendation!

Edited by clarke68
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I forgot to mention that the multi-track master of "Let's Get Lost" is 24 track analogue with Dolby SR noise reduction (15ips 185nw/+0) and the mix was an analogue on an SSL 9000 J. The two layers on the SACD are identical. The only difference between the two stereo layers is their resolution. You can clearly hear the difference between SACD and Redbook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Okay, just did the the comparison between the "Let's Get Lost" SACD and redbook (that I got from the library) on my friend's system. We used his modded Sony player for the SACD and a Marantz CD5001/Benchmark DAC1 combo for the redbook, playing through his Linkwitz Orions (best speakers I've ever heard).

The difference was very subtle. Nothing really stood out in the overall presentation, but the SACD sounded a touch more lifelike. On redbook, the singers seemed to be standing a few feet in front of the band, but on SACD they seemed more integrated.

I presented this set of recordings on a High Resolution Panel at the AES Convention in 2001 and we could hear the difference from the dias sitting behind the speakers, instantly. On the panel was Tom Jung, Akira Fukada, Elliot Maser, George Massenberg, and myself.
I would think the differences would be more obvious to you since you're very familiar with the recording/performance. Not sure if an average listener on an average system would be able to tell.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always remain skeptical when I read about those double blindfold tests: There always are parameters that remain obscured.

What music do they use, how do they select it?

Do they prefer recordings with a natural room ambience recorded with minimalistic techniques, or multi-tracked studio recordings?

What musical styles do the samples cover?

I have experienced that high resolution is perceived best in combination with minimalistic recordings in a natural room ambience.

Your emotional reactions in case you don't like the music played will bias your judgment, and vice versa.

If they would publish a list with the samples used, there would be all kinds of reactions and comments. From all sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference was very subtle. Nothing really stood out in the overall presentation, but the SACD sounded a touch more lifelike. On redbook, the singers seemed to be standing a few feet in front of the band, but on SACD they seemed more integrated.

I haven't heard that recording, but it is also my general experience with SACD over CD. Audiophiles tend to exagerate differences (a cable will sound "dramatically better" :rolleyes: ), but for me a difference is only important if it can be identified without any doubt. A lot of times, I have problems hearing a clear difference with the redbook and hi-rez layer of hybrid SACDs.

The clearest advantage of higher resolution is with orchestral recordings, because it contains much more sonic information than recordings of small jazz groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...